Not really. They did do a great job on the 360 version though.
Your asking people not to apply logic and take rumour as fact. The "media bias" angle used to be restricted to the crazy YouTube channels. Now it's being applied to any critical thinking or general criticism.
What?Your asking people not to apply logic and take rumour as fact. The "media bias" angle used to be restricted to the crazy YouTube channels. Now it's being applied to any critical thinking or general criticism.
One game is corridor shooter the game by one of the most renowned devs in the pc space and the other a liner game by a dev known for pushing tech with their engines. Neither of those games often sit at native 4k and they don't have the scale of ROTR. Furthermore, a competent dev in Nixxes could only get to 1080p 60fps on the XBX. This tells me one of three things, either the visuals will take a hit or, the scale of the game will take a hit, or the dev misspoke. Built from the ground up for the XBX means nothing when the XBX still has the same Jaguar cpu as the other consoles.Wolfenstein 2 and Battlefront 2 both run dynamic resolution that often sits at native 4K and are both 60 FPS titles. So no.
I assume he means "embarrassingly close to looking bad."
yes, thats what i said. but you know..opinions. i 100% believe rise was cross gen.I guess I don't see how/why that makes a difference? The 360 version was announced a year before release, and came out the same day as the One version. Regardless of who handled the 360 version, the design and roadmap of the game was decided by CD when developing the One version with the 360 version in mind.
That will not be the case this time.
...right, but who gives a shit about the 360 version? We're talking about video games in 2018 here.I assume he means "embarrassingly close to looking bad."
Although, I think it looks amazingly good for being a downport to the 360, personally.
980ti is 5.5tflops, right?
Either way, nobody said anything about it being flatout Ultra settings. Only crazy people use Ultra settings as a first base metric of performance.
980ti is like at least 50% better than what's in the x and pro.980ti is 5.5tflops, right?
Either way, nobody said anything about it being flatout Ultra settings. Only crazy people use Ultra settings as a first base metric of performance.
Prepare for disappointment.Shadow of the Tomb Raider is one of the reasons I bought the X. After the great update to ROTR, I knew they'd really deliver. Can't wait
Sounds like a troll comment to me.Why would you expect the tech to be disappointing when the new game is being built after the specs are known and accounted for?
What specifically are you basing this on? What inside info do you have on Shadow?
You expect native 4k and 60fps? Ok.Why would you expect the tech to be disappointing when the new game is being built after the specs are known and accounted for?
Yup. Unless the game in graphically a downgrade, full 4k 60 fps is a pipe dream. Hope people don't really expect that lol. It's a 6 TFLOP GPu, not 12+.
Unless maybe they mean an unlocked fps that hits 60 when you look at the sky or the ground.
980ti is 5.5tflops, right?
Either way, nobody said anything about it being flatout Ultra settings. Only crazy people use Ultra settings as a first base metric of performance.
He never said he expected that. He is likely expecting the best console version of the game, which he's getting
Shadow of the Tomb Raider is one of the reasons I bought the X. After the great update to ROTR, I knew they'd really deliver. Can't wait
Why would you expect the tech to be disappointing when the new game is being built after the specs are known and accounted for?
Well I assumed the "After the great update to ROTR, I knew they'd really deliver." was referring to the title.No, I don't particularly, but that's totally apart from what you said and who you were responding to.
@notaarongreenberg said:You realize you will see every game in 4K 60hz as your output right?